Appropriations are money earmarked for regional groups or projects, often criticized for lack of oversight and potential for abuse. Politicians propose them to bring money to their districts, but they bypass review systems and can be used for personal gain. Some feel they are an abuse of power and need reworking.
In American politics, an appropriation is an amount of money earmarked for the use of a regional group or organization, or for a specific project in a particular area. Appropriations are often part of larger pieces of legislation and appropriations laws, and are sometimes heavily criticized, for a variety of reasons. One major perceived problem with the appropriations is that because they do not go to government agencies, the executive branch has little control over them. In 2007 alone, Congress approved $10.4 billion in appropriations.
An appropriation may be written into legislation, in which case it is considered a hard mark or mark, or it may be included in committee recommendations, which makes it a weak mark or mark. Softmarks shouldn’t be treated as legal obligations, but they often are, raising questions about how much oversight is involved with such appropriations and whether or not these earmarked funds would be approved by Congress as a whole.
As a general rule, appropriations are proposed by individual politicians who want to bring money home to their districts. They could argue that the funds allocated can be used for community betterment, ensuring their constituents are happy and healthy, but the funds can also be used to reward people and organizations who have contributed to campaigns or to attract attention in an election cycle. Citizens are often inclined to re-elect the politicians who “take home the bacon” for their districts in the form of a comfortable appropriation or two every year. Politicians also work together to approve appropriations, joining together to support specific appropriations.
One of the biggest problems with appropriations is that they bypass traditional review systems. A politician, for example, may designate earmarked funds to go to a particular group without bothering to see if other groups could use the money more efficiently. Appropriations may also be made when they are not needed, for projects that do not benefit the constituency in any way, and sometimes amount to little more than payoffs from taxpayer funds.
Congress has the power to allocate funds for the running of the country under the terms of the Constitution, but some people feel that the appropriations are an abuse of this power and would prefer to see the system reworked. While appropriations can certainly be useful at times, a lack of oversight and universal standards make it difficult for appropriations to be fair, as access to such funds is often tied to political and personal connections, rather than merit.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
